DescentBB

MD-1118 wrote:"as long as it doesn't interfere with you and yours appreciably" equates to "as long as they aren't directly harming others" in my book

My issue wasn't actually with the "appreciably" point, but with "You and yours" as opposed to "others" in general. I think we should protect people from harm, even if they aren't us or ours. Which I assume is actually what you meant.

Kilarin wrote:

MD-1118 wrote:"as long as it doesn't interfere with you and yours appreciably" equates to "as long as they aren't directly harming others" in my book

My issue wasn't actually with the "appreciably" point, but with "You and yours" as opposed to "others" in general. I think we should protect people from harm, even if they aren't us or ours. Which I assume is actually what you meant.

Pretty much. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's all-inclusive, since there's no way any one person could reasonably be expected to keep track of every single person in the world, but protecting others from harm falls under the "respect others" category in my opinion.

Oh i just had to bump this thread for this one!

Seen it. Absolute trash.

It was awesome.

Bee

shaktazuki wrote: Peace out, bros. You don't have to agree - but in the name of intellectual honesty you should engage the actual argument instead of acting like mocking idiots.

you will never get that on this board. and fortunately some of the worse anti Christian offenders have since moved on. I've found that those that vocally oppose a faith are much less tolerant that those that are of a faith.

Unless your Muslim

Bettina wrote:I've found that those that vocally oppose a faith are much less tolerant that those that are of a faith

Often, but there are certainly plenty of exceptions. Rudeness exists in plenty on both sides of the theism line. There is less excuse on the theist side, in my opinion, so I blame us more.